You said that a few posts back and you're still here spouting your shit!

You have been exposed and given a sound spanking by a fellow forum member who's obviously far more intelligent than yourself in these matters.

I guess you're now quitting again as it won't be too long before said fellow forum member looks-in and again dissects your crap!

Please STFU. You sound stupid and immature.

Wow i can't believe how affected some people are by my thoughts and accusations vs the US Government. Every article i have posted, everything about Guantanomo Bay and Israel/Iraq is VERIFIED, yet we still have some dick heads trying to defend that. I think we obviously have some long time patriots on here who won't accept anything but their Government is right.

So this is just going to turn into some meaningless playground slanging match with people brown nosing and acting tough. Which leaves my true worries about whats happening behind.

mob17 - I agree with a lot of what you've said about Syria and Iraq etc.

The thing is, there's no need to keep going on about it, people get it - they are on the whole largely an intelligent lot on these here forums.

But accusing people of being immature and to stfu isn't really going to help garner appreciation for your contributions...

That, I think, is all that people were trying to get across to you.

Glad you agree.

I think i have been relatively calm considering i've been called paranoid, racist, mad, a lunatic, talking crap and even anti US/UK with my background questioned. All because some people don't like what i say.

Sorry when someone says i got "spanked" then that does seem immature to me.

Laughable really....here everyone is airing their personal views on whats best to stop the violence in Syria, but it turns nasty.

You don't have to agree with people but simply understand their point...it makes that much more or an informed individual!

My take on the Syria issue...violence won't help. It will just lead to more innocent people getting killed and a rekindling of the middle east/west hatred - if it ever died down! Leaders need to find another way...thats what they been elected for! Who wants outsiders taking charge of their country? Surely a muslim lead resolution (as 1 MP suggested) is a better case scenario?!

And lastly when you hold these strong opinions on world issues do you really think you know the full extent/truth of the matter to the point where you can insult, ridicule and totally dismiss someone else's opinion? One minor change in the details you assume are fact could sway your opinion completely!

Im not defending anyone...just airing my 2p. I think end of the day we all agree that the situation over there is sad!

So I'm aware this will add nothing to the debate however I think it's fair to say that no-one here REALLY knows what's happening in Syria. I would however think that Assad has probably used chemical weapons, banking on the fact that countries will hesitate to intervene based on the relationship he has / is perceived to have with Russia and China.

Unfortunately all nations are stuck in a very difficult situation... They act and people get angry that they acted. They don't act and the same people get angry for not intervening.

And then there's the danger of displacing Assad, creating a power void within the country and Syria turning into another Egypt.

How can you not even admit the Iraq Dossier was "sexed up"? Why would you not even mention that we were lied to? How can you still be trying to defend your Government?

How can you not once offer any relevant collection of facts to bolster your assertions? Why do you consistently offer nothing but empty claims and fallacies -- the one above is called "red herring" -- to refute me? So far, the only things I've seen you write are your own declarations of of your opinions.

Regarding the fact that the US supplied the chemical weapons to Iraq bolsters the claim that Iraq had such things. That fact alone suggests the likelihood that each of following premises is true:

The US knew the minimum quantity of chemical weapons and/or chemical substances that Iraq had.

The US knew whether Iraq had the capacity to produce more on its own.

The US knew whether or not the quantity Saddam used was less than the quantity he obtained from the US

Therefore, it's reasonable to conclude that the US knew that at a minimum Saddam still had some of the chems left over even after using some of them.

If that conclusion is accurate, it is enough to support a claim that he had chemical WMD.

It's not my government that I'm defending. In response to your hyperbole, I offer facts, thoughts and ideas -- via inductive or deductive reasoning -- to support the claims I have made; it' is my own assertions I defend. Unlike you, I don't just toss out inflammatory remarks that I don't also support. Moreover, unlike you, I don't use logical fallacies to try to refute the claims of others.

People, let's agree to disagree and squash the beef.I've read through this entire thread and I personally concluded to myself that certain people are quite smart in their demeanour of discrimination.

It doesn't surprise me that some people are this way but such is life. I hate to think what is actually going on in Syria right now.

I think Mob17 was quite right in voicing his thoughts.

I dislike violence so that's me over and out!

Peace!

Black bold text: Aside from my disdain for unsupported claims, what is the beef?

Red text: ??? I don't understand what you mean.

Green text: Everyone is free to air their thoughts. I have no issue with that. I do believe however that if one is airing thoughts and seeking simple replies that a poll is a better vehicle than written commentary. If one bothers to offer an opinion, one should be prepared to have it contested as well as to support one's opinion with a coherent, plausible line of reasoning.

Other black text: The Syrian citizens are indeed the real losers in the situation. It is very unfortunate that they are the ones who must suffer the failings of a power hungry, control freak of a dictator like Assad. Though everyone can accept a benevolent dictator, Assad isn't one.

People, let's agree to disagree and squash the beef. I've read through this entire thread and I personally concluded to myself that certain people are quite smart in their demeanour of discrimination.

It doesn't surprise me that some people are this way but such is life. I hate to think what is actually going on in Syria right now.

I think Mob17 was quite right in voicing his thoughts.

I dislike violence so that's me over and out!

Peace!

Well said mate.

I agree with the above. Me and tony obviously have totally opposite views and beliefs. Carrying on this debate isn't going to get us anywhere as i, nor tony, will change our beliefs. Also you can't argue with such a clearly patrotic person.

In a way i'm glad we have contributed to this thread. It's not a totally one sided view, which it probably would have been, and i'm sure readers will make their own conclusions.

... It is very unfortunate that they are the ones who must suffer the failings of a power hungry, control freak of a dictator like Assad.Though everyone can accept a benevolent dictator, Assad isn't one.

Tony, Red Text: How do you know he isn't benevolent? If your only view of him has been through the media (printed and on screen), then I suggest that might just be painting him as a power hungry control freak to suit the aims and intentions of certain governments (who could also be labelled as 'power hungry control freaks' by some).

Tony, Red Text: How do you know he isn't benevolent? If your only view of him has been through the media (printed and on screen), then I suggest that might just be painting him as a power hungry control freak to suit the aims and intentions of certain governments (who could also be labelled as 'power hungry control freaks' by some).

I know he is not benevolent because even the broadest interpretation of that word would not also include going so far with one's dismay that one would kill one's own people, by chemical or other means.

I know he is not benevolent because even the broadest interpretation of that word would not also include going so far with one's dismay that one would kill one's own people, by chemical or other means.

But it's a country gripped by a civil war! As yet I have not seen 100% 'independent' proof that the chemical weapons were used by the legitimate government of Syria.

And lastly when you hold these strong opinions on world issues do you really think you know the full extent/truth of the matter to the point where you can insult, ridicule and totally dismiss someone else's opinion? One minor change in the details you assume are fact could sway your opinion completely!

And lastly when you hold these strong opinions on world issues do you really think you know the full extent/truth of the matter to the point where you can insult, ridicule and totally dismiss someone else's opinion? One minor change in the details you assume are fact could sway your opinion completely!
...

I think it entirely reasonable to ask someone who offers an unsubstantiated point view to offer something to support their perspective. Regardless of one's take on a matter, one must have some reason for believing it. Hopefully there's some sound logic behind it as well.

Beliefs lacking logic are called faith and are the domain of religion, not political discussion. And even in religion, it's possible to prove some things. For example, it is only logical that in the Western concept of God, it's logical that there is only one God. The reason for this is that the existence of an irresistible force and the immovable object requires that there cannot be two all powerful gods. If there could be two, one could choose to that force and that would preclude the other from being simultaneously that object. Thus both could not be said to be all powerful. That, of course, says nothing about there actually being such an entity, but at least if one exists, one can be sure there is only one. There can be only one. (Highlander had that much right. )

Assad promised human rights reform, not much has changed he took office.

He successfully suppressed internal dissention.

In 2006, he expanded the use of travel bans against dissidents, preventing many from entering or leaving the country.

In 2007, the Syrian Parliament passed a law requiring all comments on chat forums to be posted publicly.

In 2008, and again in 2011, social media sites such as YouTube and Facebook were blocked.

Human rights groups have reported that political opponents of Bashar al-Assad are routinely tortured, imprisoned and killed.

In the Fall of 2011, many countries called for President Bashar al-Assad's resignation and the Arab League suspended Syria.

In January 2012, the Reuters News Agency reported that more than 5,000 civilians had been killed by the Syrian militia

Protests began in Syria on January 26, 2011, demanding political reforms, a reinstatement of civil rights and an end to the state of emergency, which had been in place since 1963.

Tony, that's a good detailed list, but I ask you, there is no 'perfect' government or state in the world - one doesn't exist. For much of your list above, I could substitute the name Assad for a lot of western leaders and the name Syria for a lot of western countries,...

Assad promised human rights reform, not much has changed he took office.

Guantanamo Bay still holds prisoners despite Obama promising to close it down.

He successfully suppressed internal dissention.

Surely all governments do that to a lesser or greater extent.

In 2006, he expanded the use of travel bans against dissidents, preventing many from entering or leaving the country.

Travel bans are quite normal in western society.

In 2007, the Syrian Parliament passed a law requiring all comments on chat forums to be posted publicly.

In 2008, and again in 2011, social media sites such as YouTube and Facebook were blocked.

Ok, so the US lets its citizens believe they are posting anonymously but secretly spies them anyway.

Human rights groups have reported that political opponents of Bashar al-Assad are routinely tortured, imprisoned and killed.

Bradley (Chelsea) Manning?

In the Fall of 2011, many countries called for President Bashar al-Assad's resignation and the Arab League suspended Syria.

I suspect the Arab League is thought of in Syria the same way the US thinks of the United Nations

In January 2012, the Reuters News Agency reported that more than 5,000 civilians had been killed by the Syrian militia

On searching, I found this quote, "The UN estimates more than 5,000 Syrians have been killed in the past 10 months."

Not welcome at all, but as I stated previously, they are in a civil war and in wars people usually get killed. Of the 5,000 people killed, some of these will have been at the hands of the opposition - it's not all one-way.